The role of domain-specific knowledge in generative reasoning about complicated multileveled phenomena

Cognition and Instruction

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 271-336

  Duncan, Ravit Golan ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 38349016489     PISSN: 07370008     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07370000701632355     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Abrams, E., Southerland, S., & Cummins, C. (2001). The how's and why's of biological change: How learners neglect physical mechanisms in their search for meaning. The International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1271-1281.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Baker, L. M., & Dunbar, K. (1996). Constraints on the experimental design process in real-world science. In G. W. Cottrell (Ed.), Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 154-159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4. Bransford, J., & Stein, B. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver. New York: W. H. Freeman.
5. Brown, M. S., & Goldstein, J. L. (1986). A receptor-mediated pathway for cholesterol homeostasis. Science, 232, 34-47.
6. Buckley, B. C., Gobert, J. D., Kindfield, A. C. H., Horwitz, P., Tinker, R. F., Gerlits, B., Wilensky, U., Dede, C., & Willett, J. (2004). Model-based teaching and learning with BioLogica: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 23-41.
7. Caldwell, A., Duncan, R. G., Gelbart, H., Gogos, A., Krajcik, J., Kurth, L., Rogat, A., Roseman, J., & Yarden, A. (2006). Supporting learning progressions of modern genetics in high school. Symposium presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
8. Carraher, T. N., Carraher, D. W., & Schliemann, A. D. (1985). Mathematics in the streets and in schools. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 3, 21-29.
9. Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perceptions in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55-81.
10. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271-315
11. Collins, F. S. (1992). Cystic fibrosis: Molecular biology and therapeutic implications. Science, 256, 774-780.
12. Crick, F. (1970). Central dogma of molecular biology. Nature, 227, 561-563.
13. diSessa, A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In Pufall, George Forman & Peter B. (Ed.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp. 49-70).
14. diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2-3), 165-255.
15. diSessa, A. A. (1996). What do "just plain folk" know about physics? In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching, and schooling. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
16. diSessa, A., & Sherin, B. (1998). What changes in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1155-1191.
17. Duncan, R. G., & Reiser, B. J. (2007). Reasoning across ontologically distinct levels: Students' understandings of molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 938-959.
18. Ernst, G. W., & Newell, A (1969). GPS: A case study in general problem solving. New York: Academic Press.
19. Flavell, J. H., & Wellman, H. M. (1977). Metamemory. In R. V. Kail & J. W. Hagen (Eds.), Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Garton, G. L. (1992). Teaching genetics in the high school classroom. In M. U. Smith & P. E. Simmons (Eds.), Teaching genetics: Recommendations and research proceedings of a national conference (pp. 20-23). Cambridge, MA: National Science Foundation.
21. Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description towards an interpretive theory of culture. In C. Geertz (Ed.), The interpretation of cultures (pp. 3-30). New York: Basic Books.
22. Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (Eds.). (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Ginsburg, H. P. (1997). Entering the child's mind: The clinical interview in psychological research and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Goel, A., & Chandrasekaran, B. (1989). Functional representation of designs and redesign problem solving. In Proceedings of the eleventh international joint conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 1388-1394). Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
25. Golan, R., & Reiser, B. J. (2002). Investigating students' reasoning about the complexity manifested in molecular genetics phenomena. In Bell, P., & Reed, S. (Eds).Proceedings of the fifth international conference for the learning sciences: Keeping learning complex: fostering multidisciplinary research efforts. Seattle, Washington, 237-244. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Greeno, J. G. (1983). Conceptual entities. In Gentner, D. and Stevens, A., (Eds.), Mental models. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Press.
27. Greeno, J. G. (1978). Natures of problem-solving abilities. In W. K. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Volume 5). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29. Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D. L., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 247-298.
30. Horwitz, P. (1996). Teaching science at multiple space time scales. Communications of the ACM, 39(8), 100-102.
31. Jackson, S., Stratford, S. J., Krajcik., & Soloway, E. (1995). Making system dynamic modeling accessible to pre-college science students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the America Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
32. Jacob, F., & Monod, J. (1961) Genetic regulatory mechanisms in the synthesis of proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology, 3, 318-356.
33. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. New York: Cambridge University Press.
34. Kindfield, A. C. H. (1994). Understanding a basic biological process: Expert and novice models of meiosis. Science Education, 78, 255-283.
35. Kosslyn, S. M. (1980) Image and Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36. Lave, J., Murtaugh, M., & de la Rocha, O. (1984). The dialectic of arithmetic in grocery shopping. In B. Rogoff and J. Lave (Ed.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 67-94). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. Lewis, J., & Kattmann, U. (2004). Traits, genes, particles and information - revisiting students' understandings of genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 195-206.
38. Lewis, J., &Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division, and inheritance-do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22, 177-195.
39. Marbach-Ad, G. (2001). Attempting to break the code in student comprehension of genetic concepts. Journal of Biological Education, 35(4), 183-189.
40. Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2000). Students' cellular and molecular explanations of genetic phenomena. Journal of Biological Education, 34(4), 200-210.
41. Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994) Qualitative data analysis (2nd Ed). Thousand Oaks: Monton.
42. National Research Council (1996) National Education Standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
43. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
44. Pallant, A., & Tinker, R. (2004). Reasoning with atomic-scale molecular dynamic models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 51-66.
45. Passmore, C., & Stewart. (2002). A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 185-204.
46. Penner, D. & Klahr, D. (1996). The interaction of domain-specific knowledge and domain-general discovery strategies: A study with sinking objects. Child Development, 67, 2709-2727.
47. Penner, D. E. (2000). Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students' understanding of emergent phenomena. The Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 784-806.
48. Perkins, D. (1993). Teaching for understanding. American Educator, 17(3), 8.
49. Perkins, D. N. (1992). Smart schools: From training memories to educating minds. New York: The Free Press.
50. Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1981) The imagery debate: Analogue media versus tacit knowledge. Psychological Review, 88, 16-45.
51. Qin, Y., & Simon, H. A. (1990). Laboratory replication of scientific discovery processes. Cognitive Science, 14, 281-312.
52. Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites, and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
53. Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(1), 1-22.
54. Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, and W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 33-58). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
55. Rumelhart, D. E., & Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. InR. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 99-135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
56. Schank, R. C. (1982). Dynamic memory: A theory of reminding and learning in computers and people. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
57. Schauble, L. (1990). Belief revision in children: The role of prior knowledge and strategies for generating evidence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 49, 31-57.
58. Schunn, C., & Anderson, J. (2001). Acquiring expertise in science: explorations of what, when, and how. In K. Crowley, C. D. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 83-114). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
59. Sherin, B. (1996). The symbolic basis of physical intuition: A study of two symbol systems systems in physics instruction., unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
60. Sherin, B. (2001). How students understand physics equations. Cognition and Instruction, 19(4), 479-541.
61. Smith, J. P., diSessa, A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163.
62. Smith, M. U. (1988). Successful and unsuccessful problem solving in classical genetic pedigrees. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 411-433.
63. Southerland, S., Abrams, E., Cummins, C. L., & Anzelmo, J. (2001). Understanding students' explanations of biological phenomena: Conceptual frameworks or p-prims? Science Education, 85, 328-348.
64. Stewart, J. H. (1982). Difficulties experienced by high school students when learning basic Mendelian genetics. The American Biology Teacher, 44(2), 80-89.
65. Stewart, J., & Van Kirk, J. (1990). Understanding and problem-solving in classical genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 575-588.
66. Stewart, J., Cartier, J. L., & Passmore, P. M. (2005). Developing understanding through model-based inquiry. In M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford, J. D. (Eds.),How students learn (pp. 515-565). Washington D.C.: National Research Council.
67. Stewart, J., Hafner, B., & Dale, M. (1990). Students' alternate views of meiosis. The American Biology Teacher, 52(4), 228-232.
68. Stieff, M., & Wilensky, U. (2002).ChemLogo: An emergent modeling environment for teaching and learning chemistry. Proceedings of the fifth biannual international conference of the learning sciences, October 2002.
69. Stratford, S. J. (1997). A review of computer-based model research in pre-college science classrooms. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 16, 3-23.
70. Venville, G. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(9), 1031-1055.
71. Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: a dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 3.
72. Wynne, C. F., Stewart, J., & Passmore, C. (2001). High school students' use of meiosis when solving genetics problems. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 501-15.